تحلیل شاخص‌های جهانی محیطزیست با رویکرد توسعۀ پایدار شهر تهران

نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار گروه جغرافیا، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی تهران

2 دانشجوی دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی تهران

3 دانشیار دانشکدۀ علوم و فنون، دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

محیط‌زیست مقوله­ای مهم و مدنظر جامعۀ جهانی است که برگزاری جلسه‌های فراوان در سطوح بین‌المللی و منطقه‌ای نگرانی جامعۀ جهانی را دربارۀ آن بیان می­کند. هدف کلی پژوهش توصیفی-تحلیلی حاضر شناخت وضعیت مناطق تهران از نظر شاخص‌های محیطی است. بدین­منظور این شاخص‌ها با مشارکت کارشناسان امتیازدهی، و با تحلیل سلسله­مراتبی و نرم‌افزار Export Choice وزن‌دهی شدند. همچنین به­کمک روش‌های آماری به محاسبۀ این شاخص­ها پرداخته شد و ترسیم آن­ها در نرم‌افزار Arc Gis صورت گرفت. اطلاعات مورد نیاز پژوهش نیز با مصاحبه و استعلام از سازمان‌های مربوط به­دست آمد. نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد امتیاز مناطق 22گانۀ شهری تهران براساس ارزیابی شاخص عملکرد محیطی، بین 2/49 تا 72 است. بدین­ترتیب 10 منطقۀ شهری تهران در پهنۀ مناسب و 12 منطقه در پهنۀ نسبتاً مناسب قرار گرفته‌اند. معضلات محیط‌زیستی شهر تهران به چهار بخش تقسیم می­شود: در بخش اول با مشکلات ناشی از موقعیت جغرافیایی شهر تهران مواجهیم که در آن ضعف‌هایی از قبیل شرایط ژئومورفولوژیکی خاص، اختلاف ارتفاع زیاد بین شمال و جنوب و کاهش جهت جریان هوا مشاهده می­شود. روند شهرنشینی شتابان و تغییرات فیزیکی-کالبدی، بخش دوم این مشکلات است. سومین بخش به نقش‌های اقتصادی-اجتماعی شهر تهران مربوط است که در آن تمرکز یافته‌اند. چهارمین بخش نیز به ساختار سازمانی و تشکیلاتی نامناسب برای مدیریت کلان‌شهری تهران مربوط است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analysis of Global Environmental Indices by Urban Sustainable Development Approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Jila Sajadi 1
  • Mohammad Sadegh Afrasiabirad 2
  • Jamileh Tavakolinia 1
  • Hossein Yousefi 3
1 Associate Professor of Geography and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Iran
2 PhD Candidate in Geography and Urban Planning, Shahid Beheshti University, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of New Sciences and Technologies, University of Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
The plenty of conferences and symposiums in international and regional levels about environment show the concerns of the world about the environmental issues. There are always mutual relations between human activities and natural processes. Population growth and technological advancement are increasing the requirements of human societies. The sustainable development can be a solution for the ongoing processes. Urban expansion and development of Tehran City resulted in great changes in urban environment. The purpose of this research is to assess the urban districts of Tehran in terms of environmental indices.
Methodology
This is a descriptive analytical research. Environmental experts participated to fill the questionnaires. Some other data have been gathered by some organizational data. The criteria have been weighted using questionnaires results through Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Expert Choice. The results have been analyzed by statistical tests using SPSS. The outputs have been entered into ArcGIS for further analysis. We have also carried out Environmental Performance Index for the 22 districts of Tehran.
Results and discussion
The Environmental Performance Index for the 22 districts of Tehran is ranged from 49.2 to 72. This has indicated 10 districts are categorized as suitable and 12 relatively suitable. The highest population density is in district 10 with 36716 people in km2and the lowest is 17 with 31102 people in km2.  The worst air quality is obtained in districts of 3, 7, 10, and 18 in an order. Other indices are waste water network conditions, public health, waste management, vegetation, built area, climate, and soil water conditions.  
Conclusion
The results have revealed that the southern areas of Tehran have more proper conditions compared with northern areas. it can be said that the most important problem of the city is air pollution. The environmental conditions of Tehran can be classified into four categories. The first category is related to the problems resulted from geographical location of the city. The location is influenced by geomorphological conditions such as great height difference from north to south and problems in weather issues. The second category of problems is related to rapid immigration to this city and physical expansion.  The third category is related to social and economic functions in the city. The fourth category of the environmental issues of Tehran is resulted from organizational and institutional structure and incompetent urban management. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • TEHRAN
  • Environmental Performance Index
  • environment
  • Sustainable Development
  1. بدری، سید علی و عبدالرضا رکن‌الدین افتخاری، 1382، ارزیابی پایداری: مفهوم و روش، فصلنامة تحقیقات جغرافیایی، دورة هجدهم، شمارة 2 (پیاپی 69)، صص 9-34.
  2. بریمانی، فرامرز و صادق لفمنجانی، 1389، تعیین شدت ناپایداری زیستمحیطی سکونتگاه‌های روستایی سیستان با استفاده از مدل ارزیابی چند معیاری، مجلة جغرافیا و توسعه، دوره 8 شمارة 19،صص 127-144.
  3. پوراصغر سنگاچین، فرزام و جواد زحمتکش ممتاز، 1387، ارزیابی راهبردی محیط‌زیستی رهیافتی جهت ارتقای شاخصهای توسعة پایدار در ایران، نشریة علمی محیط و توسعه، سال اول شمارة 2، صص 9 - 20
  4. رهنمایی، محمدتقی، 1378، مجموعة مباحث و روشهای شهرسازی جغرافیا، مرکز مطالعات و تحقیقات شهرسازی و معماری، تهران.
  5. زبردست، اسفندیار، 1386، اندازة شهر، مرکز مطالعاتی و تحقیقاتی معماری و شهرسازی، تهران.
  6. طرحهای تفصیلی مناطق 22گانة شهر تهران، 1385-1386، شورای عالی معماری و شهرسازی ایران، شهرداری تهران.
  7. معطوف، شریف، 1379، نقش فرهنگ، مشارکت و محیطزیست در توسعة پایدار منطقه‌ای، فصلنامة پژوهش، دوره دوم شمارة 2، صص1 - 4
  8. نقی‌زاده، محمد، 1379، فرهنگ اسلامی و توسعة پایدار شهری، فصلنامة مدیریت شهری، سال اول، شمارة 1، صص 73 - 74
  9. یاوری، احمدرضا، پریور، پرستو و زینب یگانه‌کیا، 1389، کیفیت محیطزیست و هدایت سیستم سرزمین شهری، مجلة محیط‌شناسی ویژه‌نامة برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت محیط‌زیست، سال سی‌وششم، شمارة 5، صص 23 - 36.
    1. Badri A., and Eftekhari Roknodin, A, 2004, Sustainability Assessment: Concepts and Methods, Geography reaserch Quarterly, Vol. 18. No. 2, PP. 9-34. (In Persian)
    2. Barimani F., and Lafmanjani, S, 2011, Determine the Extent of Environmental Instability Rural Settlements Sistan Using Multi-Criteria Evaluation Model, Geography and Development Quarterly, Vol. 8, No, 19, PP. 127-144. (In Persian)
    3. Porasghar Sangachin, F., and Zahmatkesh, J., 2011, Determine the Extent of Environmental Instability Rural Settlements Sistan Using Multi-Criteria Evaluation Model, Environmental and Development Quarterly, No. 2, PP. 9-20. (In Persian)
    4. Rahnamaei, M. T., 2000, Topics and Methods of Urban Planning Geography, Urban Planning and Architecture Research Center, Tehran. (In Persian)
    5. Zebardast , E., 2008, Urban Functions in Iran, The Size of the City, Urban Planning and Architecture Research Center, Tehran. (In Persian)Strategic Plan - Structural Development of Tehran, 2007- 2008, Iran's Supreme Council of Architecture and Urbanism. (In Persian)
    6. Detailed Plans 22 Districts of Tehran, 2007- 2008, Iran's Supreme Council of Architecture and Urbanism, Tehran Municipality. (In Persian)
    7. Matof, Sh., 2001, The Role of Culture in Sustainable Development, Regional Cooperation and the Environment, Reserchs Quarterly,Vol. 2, No, 2, PP. 1 - 4. (In Persian)
    8. Naghizadeh, M., 2001, Islamic Culture and Sustainable Urban Development, Urban Management Quarterly, No, 1, PP. 73 - 74 (In Persian)
    9. Yavari, A., Parivar, P., and Yeganekia, Z., 2011, The Quality of the Environment and Guiding System of Urban Land Urban Management, Planning and Management of the Environment Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2, PP. 22 - 36. (In Persian)
    10. Alam, S., Fatima, A., and Butt, M.S., 2007, Sustainable Development in Pakistan in the Context of Energy Consumption Demand and Environmental Degradation, Journal of Asian Economics, Vol. 18, No. 5, PP. 825-837.
    11. Campbell, S., 1996, Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Citiec? Urban Planinng and the Contradictions of Sustnable Development, Jornal of American Planinng Assocation, Vol. 3, No. 62, PP. 297-298.
21. Chinander, K. R., 2001, Aligning Accountability and Awareness for Environmental Performance in Operations, Production and Operations Management , Vol. 10, No. 3, p. 276.

  1. Diamantini, C., and Zanon, B., 2000, Planning the Urban Sustainable Development the Case of the Plan for the Province of Trenton, Italy, Environmental Impact Assessment.Rev, Vol 20, No. 3, PP. 18 - 36.
  2. Eckel, L., Fisher, K., and Russell, G., 1992, Environmental Performance Measurement, CMA Management, Vol. 66, No. 2, p. 16.
  3. Elkin, T., Mclaren, D., and Hillam, M., 1991, Reviving the City: Towards Sustinable Urban Development. Friends of the Earth, London, P. 3.
  4. Epstein, M., 1994, Environmentally Responsible Corporations, Management Accounting April, 74.
  5. Figge, F. et al., 2002, The Sustainability Balanced Scorecardlinking Sustainability Management to Business Strategy, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 11, No.5, P. 269
  6. Haughton, G., and Hunter, C., 2005, Sustainable Cities, Published in the Taylor and Francis.
  7. Hosseinzadeh, S. R, 2004, Environmental Crises in Metropolises of Iran, Sustainable City Book, wit Press, England.
29. Ijiri, Y., 1975, Theory of Accounting Measurement, Studies in Accounting Research 10.

  1. Ittner, C. D., Larcker, D. F., and Randall, T., 2003, Performance Implications of Strategic Performance Measurement in Financial Services Firms, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 28, No. 7–8, PP. 715–741.
  2. Mcgranahan, G., and Saaterwaite, D., 2003, Urban Centres: An Assessment of Susstainability, Annual Review Environmental Resources 28 , PP. 243-274.
  3. Mega, V., and Pederson, J., 1998, Urban Sustinability Indicators. Luxumborg: Office for Official Publication of the Europen Comunities, P.2.
33. Neely, A., Gregory, M., and Platts, K., 1995, Performance Measurement System Design: A Literature Review and Research Agenda, Internationaljournal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 15, No. 4, PP. 80–116.

  1. Newman, P., and Kenworthy, J., 1999, Sustinability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence, Washngton, D. C. Island Press, P.146.
35. Olsthoorn, X. et al., 2001, Environmental Indicators for Business: A Review of the Literature and Standardisation Methods, Journal of Cleaner Production 9, 453–463.

  1. Pope, J., 2004, Conceptualizing Sustainability Assessment, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, PP. 595 - 616.
37. Rics Presidential Commission on Sustinability, 2007, Surveyng Sustinability: A Short Guid for the Property Professional, P.6.

38. Said, A. A., Elnaby, H., Wier, B., 2003, An Empirical Investigation of the Performance Consequences of Nonfinancial Measures, Journal of Management Accounting Research 15, 193–223.

39. Schaltegger, S., and Burritt, R., 2000, Contempory Environmental Accounting: Issues, Concepts and Practice, Greenleaf Publishing Limited, Sheffield, UK.

  1. Smith S., and Sheate, W., 2001, Sustainability Appraisal of English Regional Plans: Incorporating the Requirements of the EU Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive, Impact Assess Proj Apprais, Vol. 19, No.1, PP. 263– 276.
  2. UN- Habitatand Departement for International Development (DFID), 2002, Chapter 4. PP. 18-27.
42. Veleva, V., and Ellenbecker, M., 2000, A Proposal for Measuring Business Sustainability: Addressing Shortcomings in Existing Frameworks, Greener Management International, No. 31, 101–119.

  1. Verdagur, C., 2002, Urban Development and Sustainability, Contribution to the Ecocity Project W, P. 2.
  2. Wheeler, S., 1996, Sustinable Urban Development: A Literature Review and Analysis, Univercity of California at Berkeley Press, California, P. 55.
  3. Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy (YCELP) and Center for International Erath Science Information Network (CIESIN) of Columbia University, 2006-2016, Environmental Sustainability Index. Usa.
  4. Ilinitch, A. Y., Soderstrom, N. S., and Thomas, T. E., 1998, Measuring Corporate Environmental Performance, Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Vol. 17, No. 4 and 5, P. 383.
  5. Satierthwaite, D., 1997, Sustainable Cities or Cities that Contribute to Sustainable Development, Urban Studies, Vol. 34, No. 10, PP. 1667-1691